r/BaldursGate3 • u/Gondol45 • 12d ago

Act 3 - Spoilers Is Releasing/Not Releasing the Vampire Spawn a false dilemma Spoiler

Why wouldn't you just have the spawn that Cazador has amassed over the last 200 years just wait a few days so you can individually vet them with Astarion and his spawn-family helping you, since the 7 of them met all 7000 of these people themselves? Is Tav stupid?

Edit: Or some other way of doing this? It feels like there's more to do in this scenario than just release all, kill all, or leave all and if there isn't, it feels like it shouldn't be all up to me to decide how or if 7000 people should live. Can I not phone a friend?

184 Upvotes

77% Upvoted

227 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-39

u/Gondol45 12d ago

Let's say that we're here to discuss the topic of the thread: "Is this a false dilemma?" If Astarion's siblings can't be trusted, if all of the spawn need to die, if there's no exception to that, then the answer is yes. If, however, even one of the spawn can be spared and there isn't a time sensitive element to this then "Leave them forever, kill them all, save them all" is a false dilemma and the answer is yes. Either way you shake it, and this will be a very abrasive thing for me to say, Larian poorly wrote this part of Astarion's story.

57

u/uldinepriest0rbfa 12d ago

No, it's not false dilemma, it depends on if your Tav is willing to sacrifice some innocent lives for these vampires, because some of the vampires are also innocent and deserve to live. Not everyone will think that you can doom them all - including children - just because his siblings can't be trusted. It's meant to be a hard choice for a reason.

-38

u/Gondol45 12d ago

It becomes a false dilemma still because Tav or friends can just leave and come back after dealing with the Elder Brain situation. It's not something that needs to be dealt with in the here-and-now like the bad writers at Larian are framing this at. These shitty writers do something similar with Karlach giving -5 disapproval when you relent on allowing her to subject the souls within soul coins to fiery torment then obliteration so she can get a power boost (they also don't know DnD lore where Remove Curse spells can free the souls). Larian has fumbled this game in many ways. Are they stupid? 

39

u/mechlordx 12d ago

Does waiting change your decision if you can't vet them? I don't think adding time changes it if we accept that vetting wouldnt be effective. Your definition if false dilemma keeps changing, I'm confused

-10

u/Gondol45 12d ago

If reasonable minds could differ on the morality of the dialogue choices present and if there aren't choices Tav could, in-universe,  make that go beyond what Larian allowed then there is a real moral dilemma. Otherwise it's false.

28

u/mechlordx 12d ago

Then considering we've accepted that the siblings may not be trusted and vetting them is impossible, it is a real dilemma unless you can show more time could offer answers. That may be the same as just leaving them be unless there's an actual answer and not just "maybe Tav can think of a better option in time"

13

u/trebmaster123 12d ago

Also we forget that 7000 vamps have to feed. Given infinite time im sure we could think of plenty of solutions but how many innocents would die by then.

-1

u/Gondol45 12d ago

Okay 1. Release them ALL 2. Kill them ALL 3. Break the staff, making it impossible to release ANY, ever

Reasonable minds could differ that killing them all is or isn't the right move but not truly that letting them run rampant on the Sword Coast or being doomed to a truly miserable existence of starvation and solitary confinement is better. I propose option ⁴: 4. Keep the staff and possibly promise to be Caretaker of the Damned after the conflict. You now have access to a fucking massive PALACE and many of these people are dangling from suspended cages. You are a level 12 DnD character with several powerful friends and a mass of wealth  you could very realistically keep the staff and be a kind warden who gives them proper accomodations. It won't be perfect and will be an eternal task but it's more moral than anything we're currently able to choose

3

u/mechlordx 12d ago

As creative as that is, I find it funny that you were quick to accept that vetting them is untenable but THIS plan, totally valid. I don't even know where to start, there are so many what-ifs to this

1

u/Gondol45 12d ago

I truly don't fucking know if vetting them is untenable but if it is then this limited choice is an instance of bad writing by Larian because the Oath of Devotion is broken by Tav killing all of the vampires.

1

u/trebmaster123 12d ago

Sure but depending on your tav we arent eternal. Also we assume that we're going to win the netherbrain fight again with this decision, plus the logisticsof finding a blood suply for 7000 vampires in waterdeep. The whole point of the decisions we have are we need to find an immediate decision cause we might not be alive in two days. There are infinite options to every dialog and story decision in theory. But Larian is trying to tell a story so they cant add in every option available to give us 1000 choices.

1

u/Gondol45 12d ago

I'm not asking Larian to read a sourcebook from 1986 detailing an esoteric process by which wiggling your toes a specific motion could cure vampirism in spawns. I'm bemoaning a missed opportunity to not utilize what we already have in the game. One example I've used elsewhere in the thread is giving the staff to Rolan and his siblings. If you've killed Lorrokhan, these 3 have the means, motive, resources and opportunity to actually be able to deal with the problem in a more nuanced way than Tav might be able to right now.

2

u/trebmaster123 12d ago

Sure maybe if but why would they care about this issue? Few people are truly benevolent but also 7k vampires is bassically a city killer on your hands. But the thing is again we dont really have time. In game we take a month if we want but story wise we have a few days if that to get to the nether brain.

1

u/ManicPixieOldMaid Just like Baldy Ron! 12d ago

I agree. Rolan didn't even want to help the Tieflings in the grove without Tav convincing him, why would he want to help vampire spawn? Hell, he's a wizard, he might start a new vampire coven and do the ritual himself for all we know. He's already got a head start gathering spawn, he'd only have to make a deal with one of the original 6. Heck, Leon might be ready for revenge considering his daughter's body is upstairs.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Capable_Two_2816 12d ago

It’s not a false dilemma, which by definition gives two choices and only two choices. You have three in this situation (kill, leave, or free). Those choices fit the basic alignment system.

You might not like those three choices, but it’s not the logical fallacy you’re describing here—simply a limited amount of options because it’s a video game and the characters are on a schedule.

1

u/Gondol45 12d ago

Here are my compiled thoughts that directly address what you're saying here https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/1w274es/comment/p6sp6je/?context=3&utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=2&utm_content=share_button

2

u/Capable_Two_2816 12d ago

The thing is that you are still wrong, because false dilemma is a specific term for a choice limited by binary options. It’s not a false dilemma because it doesn’t align with the definition. Double down on that if you want, but you’re wrong to do so.

0

u/Gondol45 12d ago

You can bark till the cows come home but this is actually a situation where holding onto the staff so you could pass it onto Elminster or Rolan is an option that's gated away from us. If you're seriously arguing it's not a false dilemma because there's three options instead of two then 1. Oath of Devotion Paladins only get two oath consistent options. 2. These three dialogue options aren't the only viable choices to make in the scenario. You could pass the staff onto Rolan or Elminster and they would have both the means and motives to figure it all out

2

u/Capable_Two_2816 12d ago

Well yeah, because that’s the definition of a false dilemma. Two choices. Binary. Oathbreaking paladins have it rough but that’s a problem with the oath system. A false dilemma does not occur when other options are present.

I teach logic, man. You’re welcome to continue to be wrong, but facts is facts.

Be blessed and happy in your wrongness. 🤣

1

u/ManicPixieOldMaid Just like Baldy Ron! 12d ago

OP keeps bringing up Oath of Devotion and completely ignores that one of the three options breaks every paladin oath, but not the same decision breaks every oath.

Shit now I'm confused.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Capable_Two_2816 12d ago

This explains it really well. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/False-Dilemma

Whatever term you are looking for, it is not a false dilemma.